Options
An interesting comparison for those who think PCGS is tougher than NGC.
Accented Hair Kennedy Half Dollars.
NGC graded:
Brilliant: 1335
Cameo: 407
UCAM: 25
Total: 1767
% UCAM: 1.4
PCGS graded:
Brilliant: 1153
Cameo: 260
DCAM: 57
Total: 1470
% DCAM: 3.9
Russ, NCNE
NGC graded:
Brilliant: 1335
Cameo: 407
UCAM: 25
Total: 1767
% UCAM: 1.4
PCGS graded:
Brilliant: 1153
Cameo: 260
DCAM: 57
Total: 1470
% DCAM: 3.9
Russ, NCNE
0
Comments
<< <i>But PCGS commands more money, so more DCAMs have likely been submitted to them and not NGC >>
I think you might be right on that... especially in a market like it currently is, the Registry Craze and all...
42/92
<< <i>But PCGS commands more money, so more DCAMs have likely been submitted to them and not NGC >>
At first blush, that argument might have merit. But, it assumes that none of the cameos submitted were done so in hopes of a DCAM or UCAM. Since the cameo population at NGC is much higher than PCGS, that argument is negated. Otherwise, we'd have to assume that the majority of submitters can accurately predict precisely what the designation will be. We know that is not the case.
Russ, NCNE
The Ludlow Brilliant Collection (1938-64)
Pcgs DCAM: 57
22 of the ngc ucams were crossed to pcgs. 18 of them made dcam.
15 of the pcgs dcams were cracked out and sent back for a higher grade.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
The Lincoln cent store:
http://www.lincolncent.com
My numismatic art work:
http://www.cdaughtrey.com
USAF veteran, 1986-1996 :: support our troops - the American way.
But seriously folks.....if a coin is truly worthy of the grade it'll be crossed to PCGS inorder to get the most buck$. I only collect PCGS 'cause I know I'm right!
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
I have at one time owned 5 ngc modern coins... 4 of those I have had the same coin in a pcgs holder of the same grade (83-d,85 ms67rd cents, 1970 ms66 quarter, 1995-d ms66 half). In all 4 of these cases the ngc coin was far superior to the pcgs one! The exception was a terrible ms66rd ngc 73-s cent.
But, of course this might be biased, because I may be more selective when buying ngc ones becasue of the stigma "they aren't as good". But who knows, maybe my small sampling of ngc modern coins is an accurate depiction overall.
Oh yeah, never buy ngc Mercury Dimes. They're overgraded by a good 2 points (from my 2 coin sample of a 34-d,35-s).
WNC Coins, LLC
1987-C Hendersonville Road
Asheville, NC 28803
wnccoins.com
<< <i>For the most part I believe that the difference between PCGS and NGC is so slight as to almost not matter and in any case the lines are blurred enough that there is overlap. >>
Just look at most coin ads. If a dealer has both a PCGS and an NGC of the same coin and grade, he'll ask more for the PCGS 90% of the time. And that ain't just to catch us dummies!
<< <i>
<< <i>For the most part I believe that the difference between PCGS and NGC is so slight as to almost not matter and in any case the lines are blurred enough that there is overlap. >>
Just look at most coin ads. If a dealer has both a PCGS and an NGC of the same coin and grade, he'll ask more for the PCGS 90% of the time. And that ain't just to catch us dummies!
WNC Coins, LLC
1987-C Hendersonville Road
Asheville, NC 28803
wnccoins.com
since you are the acknowledged forum guru with the AH Kennedy Half-Dollars and have likely seen more examples in each company's holders, what do you say, absent the pop numbers?
al h.
- wallstreetman, aka joyofmoderns
1964 Jeff Proof
PCGS - graded
Brilliant - 1130
Cameo - 746
Dcam - 476 (20%)
NGC graded
Brilliant - 1057
Cameo - 454
Ucam - 86 (5%)
1968 Jeff Proof
PCGS - graded
Brilliant - 148
Cameo - 83
Dcam - 555 (71%)
NGC graded
Brilliant - 122
Cameo - 57
Ucam - 43 (19%)
The PCGS Dcam pops go upsidedown in year 68-72 (more dcams than cams). NGC's pops don't go upsidedown till 72.
Edited to add - PCGS cares more about mirrors than NGC. NGC cares more about white devices. At NGC, a coin with white devices will Ucam even if it has a little frost in the fields. PCGS is more lenient of the color of the devices if the mirrors are deep. JMO
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
comparing numbers is interesting from the standpoint of trying to prove a point, but it doesn't really do any good without seeing what was submitted and what grades those submittals received.
you need to edit those 1968 PCGS numbers.
al h.
Al, I looked again and they are 148, 83, and 555. What did I missing something? Although I understand your point regarding what is submitted, it is cameo designation not grade that those numbers reflect. Since that's a much broader category, I think the pops are pretty useful, even though it's apples and oranges as CC suggested.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
al h.
PCGS leans more toward mirror depth when granting the DCAM designation. They like smooth, glassy uninterrupted mirrors and for coins that are VERY strong in that area, they will forgive a little weakness in the frost of the devices. NGC leans more toward the devices, and with excellence in that area will forgive a little weakness in the mirrors.
The Accented Hair rarely - if ever - comes with that "paper white, super nova" frost that can sometimes be found on the regular Kennedy. The bust is just ever so slightly more concave, and the striking not normally as strong. However, the coin can come with amazing mirror depth. Thus, given the slightly different emphasis of the two companies, it makes perfect sense that PCGS would have graded more in DCAM than NGC has graded in UCAM for this particular coin.
There is also some merit to the argument that NGC is easier on the cameo designation than PCGS. Although, as of late, that has not been my experience. The recently graded NGC cameo examples I've seen would have no trouble receiving the cameo designation at PCGS.
Both companies, though, can be a bit inconsistent.
Russ, NCNE
..........................MS-65FBL...................MS-66FBL...................MS-67FBL
PCGS...................15,852.........................3,189...........................64
NGC.......................3,763............................338............................9
Numbers are cumulative for all dates and taken from R&I Coins March newsletter. The PCGS MS-65FBL number is 4.21 times greater than that of NGC. The MS-66FBL number at PCGS is 9.43 times greater than that at NGC! And the MS-67FBL number at PCGS is 7.11 times greater than that at NGC. Substantial differences.
K S
A.Keets-
Do you take the same exception to D.Hall's use of numbers attempting to validate PCGS' position as "the best"?
Their good reputation is justified only by their longevity in the business.
<< <i>A notable example is the business strike Franklin half dollars with the FBL designation.
..........................MS-65FBL...................MS-66FBL...................MS-67FBL
PCGS...................15,852.........................3,189...........................64
NGC.......................3,763............................338............................9
Numbers are cumulative for all dates and taken from R&I Coins March newsletter. The PCGS MS-65FBL number is 4.21 times greater than that of NGC. The MS-66FBL number at PCGS is 9.43 times greater than that at NGC! And the MS-67FBL number at PCGS is 7.11 times greater than that at NGC. Substantial differences. >>
It should also be noted that PCGS and NGC grading of FBL is substantially different. NGC requires both sets of lines to be full, and PCGS does not.
First POTD 9/19/05!!
In general still, PCGS slabbed coins will command a small premium over a comparable NGC coin. Who knows, maybe the trend will change someday. For now, I think that most feel that the PCGS is still a little more conservative overall.